Iowa verdict: Hillary is UNELECTABLE

[Renew Deal]

We've been talking about this for a while. Hillary is unelectable. She cannot win a general election. Hillary lost Democrats, Liberals, AND Independents tonight. Not only did she lose, she came in 3rd. If Hillary Clinton with 99% name recognition, and unlimited money can't win a Democratic caucus in Iowa, Hillary cannot win a general election.

[valerief]

1. Bush proved you don't have to win an election. You have to steal it. nt

[Renew Deal]

4. Is that Hillary's strategery?

:wtf:

[valerief]

What am I, Madame Babushka, Psychic? How do I know? nt

[YOY]

24. Madame Babushka? Madame "Grandmother"?

n/t

[stillcool]

10. ain't it the truth...

sure makes me think about why the dem leadership is so blase about our electoral process.

[K Gardner]

2. I'm tellin ya.. it's going to be Obama v Edwards.. and I'll be happy

and work like hell for either.

[Stephanie]

11. Me too.

CHANGE IS GOOD.

[journalist3072]

3. What a B.S. post....I'd like for you to repeat this words January 20, 2009 when she's in the WH

[Renew Deal]

5. OK Baghdad Bob

:eyes:

[Quixote1818]

12. LOL!

That was awesome! :thumbsup: :rofl:

[Hepburn]

21. In the WH....doing what?

Congratulating the Repiggie that beat her in November 2008?

[Quixote1818]

6. Read this. Interesting take on why Hillary would struggle in Iowa

...The peculiar Iowa dynamic includes the arcane rules -- and permissible horse-trading, perhaps -- of the caucus system, in which there are no secret ballots, and people are herded across the room to declare their preference for president of the United States.

Hence, the following speculative morsel I picked up on the phone in a conversation with one Democratic candidate's (obviously not Hillary Clinton) deputy in Iowa: his particular anti-Hillary camp's expectation--or hope--that many caucus goers may be downright reluctant to be visibly observed by friends and neighbors as favoring Clinton. This reasoning (or wishful thinking) runs particularly strong regarding caucus goers who have initially favored a candidate who fails to reach the required 15 percent threshold. The supporters of such a failing candidate, under the theory explained to me, would be under especially heavy peer pressure, given the importance of their second-choice, and the high stakes generally of what is involved in this evening's event. Thus (under the theory put forward) these individuals under intense observation in the caucus pen would rather not spend the rest of the political season being identified in their neighborhoods and community as the ones who threw their votes to Hillary Clinton, about whom antagonistic feelings of more than a few Democrats, not just Republicans, run high. (The so-called "polarizing factor.") Interesting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/03/carl-bernstein-discusses-_n_79676.html

[beachmom]

34. So the secret ballot is her friend? Hmmm. Well, that went on a bit

in '04. Some people quietly voted for Bush. But I think that's weird that even in a Democratic only race, people are embarrassed to say they voted for her. That strikes me more as a GE matter for swing voters.

[antiimperialist]

7. Dude, the primaries just started

And Hillary does well against every Republican except for McCain.

[tblue37]

23. And McCain just answered an antiwar questioner in NH by

saying that he would not be bothered by the idea of having American troops in Iraq for a hundred years--or even a thousand or a million years. I would say he's is not exactly in touch with the mood of the public.

[usregimechange]

8. Kick! on to the main page

[texpatriot2004]

9. I agree. I was a Clinton supporter back in the 90's but I am not

supporting HRC. I agree, she's not electable, that is not why I am not supporting her but I think she is too polarizing and cannot win. Let's hope the time reign of the *'s and the Clinton's is over.

[TwilightZone]

13. You determined this after one state?

Pretty impressive.

[Renew Deal]

16. No, it was well established.

One state just reinforced it.

[TwilightZone]

19. Sure it is.

Iowa is representative of nothing except Iowa.

[mmonk]

14. It was close and one state does not make a nominee.

[Renew Deal]

17. Tell that to John Edwards

He's been here before.

[WillTheGoober]

15. umm ...

Iowa is so representative of America. haha ... :)

[earthlover]

18. Yes Hillary is unelectable. Tonight showed more reasons:

1) she does not do well with independents
2) she even lost among women voters
3) voters prefered change to experience

So what does Hillary bring to the table that can enable her to win?

Her concession speech, unlike Edwards', was gracious. (Edwards didn't even congratulate Obama). However contrast Hillary's speech, good as it was, with Obama's speech. Obama's was transformational. I have not heard a beter speech since Robert Kennedy.

[Hepburn]

20. Exactly.

This has always been a problem with Hillary IMO. If she is the head of the Dem ticket this year, we all lose....right on down the line.

[ooga booga]

22. 2004 in the rear view mirror......

Looking back at the Iowa caucus of 2004 that's where John Kerry started to take control. It was also the point that the Democratic ticket began to lose -- in my humble opinion. He was and is a very capable man who could've handled the presidency -- but he couldn't make the sale to the electorate.

I worry that the same may be true of Barak Obama....

Back in '92, Bill Clinton didn't win New Hampshire. He had a rocky start, and, once he had the nomination, he still looked like he'd lose to Bush Sr. -- until Ross Perot dealt him a winning hand.

There's a whole lot of politics yet to come. Iowa is just the first volley. I just hope that we Democrats can draw a real winner out of the mix this time. 2008 oughta be OUR year -- but we still have a real chance of having it slip away...again.

[Renew Deal]

25. I didn't think about it that way

But I think you're correct. I had a bad feeling from the moment Kerry took Iowa.

[LanternWaste]

26. I imagine after last night's caucus...

I imagine after last night's caucus, there will be many varied and righteous prognostications shouted from the rooftops much like yours, all of them claiming to be absolute fact and all of them worth only as much as the others.

I imagine many people will see the IA caucus as a "proof" of X, Y or Z rather than merely the first of many such contests.

I imagine most of these people are young and simply haven't seen many primaries in their lives.

[Renew Deal]

28. And experience old folk such as your self will not be able to debunk them

What exactly do you disagree with?

[BigDDem]

27. Brilliant, really

Hey, lets just let Iowa and Iowa only pick the nominee.

[win_in_06]

29. I agree. Her name recog and $$$ should have carried her

but it wasn't enough

[Orsino]

33. It will carry her.

She will win in a few states. It's not too surprising that the midwesterner won in Iowa.

[jazzjunkysue]

38. Will she get the vote out? I think not. Poll vs election: Who shows up.

I don't think peopel will swamp the voting booths for her. But I think they will for either John or Barak. And forget the GOP. They're staying home unless they're switching parties. The party faithfull will be at the local bar on election day, toasting the end of their great 8 years.

[HamdenRice]

30. Third place = not inevitable!

Maybe the MSM will stop trying to shove her down our throats for a few.

[Orsino]

31. Baloney. The Dems could win running an HIV-positive dachshund.

Whoever "we" is, they're wrong, particularly for jumping to this conclusion before Clinton wins a few primaries herself.

[Renew Deal]

35. If she wins some primaries

Don't assume anything.

[Orsino]

36. I'm assuming that she could win New York...

...but yeah, there are no guarantees, and even as seasoned a politican as she is could flame out. She's coasted on stardom for many years now, and may have just realized that she will need to work for votes.

I'm very, very curious as to whether NH's results will resemble Iowa's.

[bluedog]

32. well...............,Iowa does not SPEAK for me

and I would guess not for others.......the states have not yet begun to vote for their choice!////Iowa does not make the election!

[hayu_lol]

37. Bleachers, as usual you mouth the usual, for you, platitudes...

here are the numbers that clearly say you are a fool:

Obama got 40% of the vote.

Edwards/Hillary are tied and they control 60% of the vote.

Your nonsense ignores that even Biden and Dodd and Richardson may still be alive in NH with write ins. All three NH Kucinichites will also continue to give Dennis their support.

This thing ain't even close to being close at this point.

[Beacool]

39. Don't you think that you're a tad premature???

The average voter doesn't give a damn who IA or NH pick as their candidate of choice. When has anybody heard someone say that they voted for X candidate based solely on who won in IA & NH??? I for one have never cared, nor will I ever care, who either state chooses as their candidate. I have always voted for my guy/gal without caring about how they did in other states. Then again, I have a mind of my own.......